Monday, August 21, 2006

The next iPod shuffle?


I've not seen one in 'the flesh', but the first images of the miniscule (think 'iPod shuffle-size') music player look very nice indeed. In particular, the OLED LCD display (similar to that used by the latest Sony music players) manages to be both attractive and clear.

Reviews have been mixed so far, software is PC-only, it won't play AAC files, and the software and documentation appear to be flaky. But if Apple added this display techology to the iPod Shuffle... mmm...

Find out more on this page.
------------

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

The controls looks atrocious compared to those on the iPod Shuffle.

I now have a nano, but I miss my shuffle for the one-thumb blind-operation controls. The ring control scheme is really innovative and functional.

The controls on this "shuffle-killer" are completely flat, touch sensitive (bad), and you can't possibly accurately control the thing without looking.

The shuffle enables you to wrap your hand around the lower part of the player while resting your thumb on the controls at the top. You can't wrap your hand around this player as your hand would be all over the controls.

I'm all for Apple to eventually add a screen to the shuffle, but they'll have to find a way not to break the original physical interface design.

If Apple puts a screen on the front of the shuffle, where the empty space is, you'd have the problem where if you hold it like the older models, you'd obscure the screen with your hand/thumb.

The only solution I see for Apple to add a screen while keeping the form factor and controls would be to make the round control ring rotatable in 90 degrees increments.

That way you could operate it sideways while looking at the screen, or rotate the controls to use it like the old one, in "blind mode", where you wrap your hand around the screen part and rest your thumb on the controls.

brett jordan said...

yes, i agree, the shuffle's elegance is a lovely thing, but i have got too used to 'seeing' my music.

thanks for the comment

b